spulapa
08-10 01:53 PM
lets do something about it....!!
We need a lot of support from different members irrespective what category they are from.
We need a lot of support from different members irrespective what category they are from.
wallpaper miniature Gibson Les Paul
sanjeev_2004
06-30 09:33 PM
In my opinion July 9th onward is the best time to send 485 packages to USCIS. But this is only my opinion and understanding and every one is free to do any thing with their own decisions or with help of their attorney.
Most of the time my many decisions didn’t proven to be good in past as for as my GC processing goes. So please take your own decision yourself and dont be stressed.
Most of the time my many decisions didn’t proven to be good in past as for as my GC processing goes. So please take your own decision yourself and dont be stressed.
flresident
04-08 11:36 AM
I went to India for vacation in Dec end, 2008 and came back on Jan end, 2009.
This was my 4th trip in 8 years.
POE: Atlanta with my wife and 2 kids.
process was lengthy but lady officer was very nice, usual questions, no issue at all.
I renewed my H1b stamp in India also. same. usual questions about my job and visa. some questions to my wife also for H4 renewal. No issue at all.
I hope this helps (in calming down) guys who are visiting india. No need to panic if your documents are ok.
This was my 4th trip in 8 years.
POE: Atlanta with my wife and 2 kids.
process was lengthy but lady officer was very nice, usual questions, no issue at all.
I renewed my H1b stamp in India also. same. usual questions about my job and visa. some questions to my wife also for H4 renewal. No issue at all.
I hope this helps (in calming down) guys who are visiting india. No need to panic if your documents are ok.
2011 Gibson Custom Shop Les Paul
bharol
07-28 01:16 PM
can the person who started the thread tell me how is this issue related to Green card backlog or any other immigration related issue?
:mad:
:mad:
more...
ak27
02-08 08:00 PM
Varsha,
I can try to make it but I am not from his district..
I can try to make it but I am not from his district..
gcinterview
11-25 10:37 AM
My 2 cents... If you need to switch careers say from IT to any other do from a Top 10 in campus school.
Part time MBA is good if you want to move up your own career(say IT). Do something thats AACSB accredited and is reasonably ranked. Business week has a specific ranking for Parttime MBA.
Any excess payment for a non ranked Part-time MBA over 50K is cost of lost opportunity. The money could be better invested somewhere else.
Part time MBA is good if you want to move up your own career(say IT). Do something thats AACSB accredited and is reasonably ranked. Business week has a specific ranking for Parttime MBA.
Any excess payment for a non ranked Part-time MBA over 50K is cost of lost opportunity. The money could be better invested somewhere else.
more...
GCard_Dream
01-17 02:05 PM
:D I can understand your frustration and I am also surprised by the very slow response. As crucial as this year is for immigration reform, if members aren't committed for immigration reform and aren't helping monetarily and every other way possible, the GC saga will continue for years to come.
I thought everyone in this forum is high skilled and very well educated. Well that may be but if members who think that just checking this site for updates and not contributing for the cause in anyway will eventually bring the relief are not very smart, aren't thinking right.
Hoping for the best and just checking updates isn't the answer to retrogression; contribution is.
Yes it is upto members if they want this process to be like the greencard process and we can wait for years to get a bill passed. We represent a community of highly skilled and get paid above average (than average american) but If we want 20 opinions per month on what IV should focus on, we can get those right away. However $20 per month is difficult.
IV really want to go all out and use all resources to get the bill passed. We cannot do it without the support of all members.Pls. Visit this page http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=25
and start contributing today.
I thought everyone in this forum is high skilled and very well educated. Well that may be but if members who think that just checking this site for updates and not contributing for the cause in anyway will eventually bring the relief are not very smart, aren't thinking right.
Hoping for the best and just checking updates isn't the answer to retrogression; contribution is.
Yes it is upto members if they want this process to be like the greencard process and we can wait for years to get a bill passed. We represent a community of highly skilled and get paid above average (than average american) but If we want 20 opinions per month on what IV should focus on, we can get those right away. However $20 per month is difficult.
IV really want to go all out and use all resources to get the bill passed. We cannot do it without the support of all members.Pls. Visit this page http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=25
and start contributing today.
2010 2006 gibson les paul standard
Desertfox
10-29 08:14 PM
EB3 India
PD July 06
I-140 Approved
485 Pending:D
PD July 06
I-140 Approved
485 Pending:D
more...
crystal
02-15 04:48 PM
Can you let me know, why US is applying this logic to 15% of EB immigrants only, while leaving it open with out any limits for FBs and Others which constitues to the major part of immigration?
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps. :)
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps. :)
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
hair Gibson Les Paul Standard 5
Slumdog
01-22 06:29 PM
As mentioned posted new thread. here you go.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23267
Happy Reading..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23267
Happy Reading..
more...
ArkBird
03-11 11:11 PM
More like KLPD :)
hot Gibson Les Paul Standard
Macaca
07-17 09:24 AM
I am just re-posting something that I had posted elsewhere. I really think that we have to be professional and mature in our response. Does anyone know how one can go about writing an op-ed in the New York Times?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think IV should write a letter to the New York Times refuting the claims of NumbersUSA. This should be in response to the article that the New York Times published regarding NumbersUSA's influence on the immigration bill.
Please send email to reporter Robert Pear (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html). The email should include URL to authentic URL that requires H1B's to pay ALL taxes.
The article: Little-Known Group Claims a Win on Immigration (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/us/politics/15immig.html) By ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) New York Times, July 15, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think IV should write a letter to the New York Times refuting the claims of NumbersUSA. This should be in response to the article that the New York Times published regarding NumbersUSA's influence on the immigration bill.
Please send email to reporter Robert Pear (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html). The email should include URL to authentic URL that requires H1B's to pay ALL taxes.
The article: Little-Known Group Claims a Win on Immigration (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/us/politics/15immig.html) By ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) New York Times, July 15, 2007
more...
house Epiphone Les Paul Standard.
singhsa3
03-04 10:21 AM
Same letter sent to wall street journal and left a voicemail for one of the reporters.
Except the opening said:
We don�t claim that my proposition here will make the housing crisis go away or bring the economy out of recession. What I am proposing in this letter is to think out of box and let us make our share of contribution to the economy.
Except the opening said:
We don�t claim that my proposition here will make the housing crisis go away or bring the economy out of recession. What I am proposing in this letter is to think out of box and let us make our share of contribution to the economy.
tattoo 2006 gibson les paul standard
mps
07-23 04:58 PM
My attorney has specifically advised us that we don't have to file again. My application reached NSC on July 2nd.
Continuing on this forum with more generic title
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
Continuing on this forum with more generic title
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
more...
pictures Epiphone: Les Paul Standard
meridiani.planum
03-07 05:32 PM
Until last year, it was important to announce a job change via AC21 to USCIS. This was because many sponsoring employers would revoke the 140 (even after 180 days) so that they could reuse the Labor for someone else.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
dresses Epiphone Les Paul Standard
sanju
11-12 08:38 PM
The above post is senseless !! who cares who votes for whom and who does what ?? what democrats do and what republicans do is not in our hands - nor do we decide who comes in power. our aim should be to try and come up with a plan and act on it. whether it succeeds or not is not in our hands ...doing something is better than nothing. so if u have a better plan come up with it and we will support and act on it.
"Who cares who votes for whom and who does what?"
My Dear Friend AlbertPinto,
Things don't move in vacuum. How people vote has everything to do with how lawmakers vote and how lawmakers vote has everything to do with what bills pass. You just want the bill so that you can get green card, end of story. And anything other than that is "who cares".
Look, without making and attempt to understand how things work in DC/Congress, sending flowers and cards to Obama, don't expect things to change. Tunnel vision is very dangerous, just like half knowledge.
Although we do not control who comes into power, if we wish to have our issues addressed, we have the responsibility to understand why/how someone or some party won the elections. Please stop behaving like and IT project manager where someone will come up with a silver bullet solution/plan and then implementation of that one silver bullet will fix everything. Getting bills passed in congress is not an IT project. I think the plan has been laid by the core team. I understand that core team has repeatedly told us to get more actively involved, raise money to help with advocacy and create awareness of the issue. Posting few messages on the web forum is not the measure of how involved someone is. But it appears most people on this forum do not want to do what the core seems to be telling us. We just want to come up with an way way out, a silver bullet solution, well defined project plan, and at the end of time and money, we must see the desired result. Maybe that's why some of the folks keep asking for the "plan". And discussion about who won the election and how people/lawmakers vote is seen as out of place and unnecessary.
.
"Who cares who votes for whom and who does what?"
My Dear Friend AlbertPinto,
Things don't move in vacuum. How people vote has everything to do with how lawmakers vote and how lawmakers vote has everything to do with what bills pass. You just want the bill so that you can get green card, end of story. And anything other than that is "who cares".
Look, without making and attempt to understand how things work in DC/Congress, sending flowers and cards to Obama, don't expect things to change. Tunnel vision is very dangerous, just like half knowledge.
Although we do not control who comes into power, if we wish to have our issues addressed, we have the responsibility to understand why/how someone or some party won the elections. Please stop behaving like and IT project manager where someone will come up with a silver bullet solution/plan and then implementation of that one silver bullet will fix everything. Getting bills passed in congress is not an IT project. I think the plan has been laid by the core team. I understand that core team has repeatedly told us to get more actively involved, raise money to help with advocacy and create awareness of the issue. Posting few messages on the web forum is not the measure of how involved someone is. But it appears most people on this forum do not want to do what the core seems to be telling us. We just want to come up with an way way out, a silver bullet solution, well defined project plan, and at the end of time and money, we must see the desired result. Maybe that's why some of the folks keep asking for the "plan". And discussion about who won the election and how people/lawmakers vote is seen as out of place and unnecessary.
.
more...
makeup Epiphone Slash Les Paul Gold
vshar
03-12 01:56 PM
You are accusing IV for cheating before saying IV is a great platform. Can't you make up your mind. You sound more like that Congressman Massa from NY. I am no Glenn beck so now don't start to tickle me.
I never accused IV for cheating but yes I do accuse IV for misconduct on April vis bulltein issue. misconduct does not mean cheating it means that they did not do what they are supposed to do at the time when all its members were anxious.
I never accused IV for cheating but yes I do accuse IV for misconduct on April vis bulltein issue. misconduct does not mean cheating it means that they did not do what they are supposed to do at the time when all its members were anxious.
girlfriend WTS - Epiphone Les Paul
sammas
07-12 04:01 PM
F. DETERMINATION OF THE NUMERICAL LIMITS ON IMMIGRANTS REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT (INA)
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
hairstyles never seen another Les Paul
greyhair
09-09 12:49 PM
What are the hopes for EB3-I?
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
vandanaverdia
09-10 04:16 PM
Done... sent to some students I know... and asked them to spread the word too...
Good job yabadaba...
Good job yabadaba...
nomi
12-12 04:31 PM
Yes, we do listen - Fixes based on your comments
While we will not respond individually to your e-mails to us, we do read - and act - on them. This page will show some of the issues you have raised and solutions that we have instituted in response.
November 15, 2006
Administrative Appeals Decisions
These decisions are currently unavailable on the USCIS web portal. We expect to have them re-published by November 30.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 8, 2006
I-LINK Materials/INA/8 CFR/etc.
While these legal materials are available (including the redacted Adjudicator's Field Manual). They may experience intermittent problems. If you try to access this material and see a blank page, refresh your browser. The page should appear. Please note: the redacted Adjudicator's Field Manual is a very large document, and may load more slowly than other legal materials.
Policy and Procedural Memoranda
These are being republished now, and should be complete no later than November 9.
Broken Forms
We are receiving a number of comments from you that a particular form is corrupt or somehow not working. If this happens to you, please let us know the following details:
The form you are attempting to download
What version of Adobe Reader or Acrobat you are using
What browser and operating system you are using (e.g., Firefox 1.x and Windows XP)
This will hopefully help us nail down the problem. Thank you
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 7, 2006
Missing I-600A Form
Replaced the form Nov. 6
Immigration Statistics
If you are looking for the immigration statistical reports we published on USCIS.gov, they can now be found at www.dhs.gov/immigrationstatistics. Or click the related link "Immigration Statistics" on this page.
Case Processing Times
If you are looking for the listing of processing times for particular application or petition types at our regional and district offices, you may find it at the related link "Case Processing Times" on this page.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=f55cc2e9bb6be010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=7220c9ee2f82b010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
While we will not respond individually to your e-mails to us, we do read - and act - on them. This page will show some of the issues you have raised and solutions that we have instituted in response.
November 15, 2006
Administrative Appeals Decisions
These decisions are currently unavailable on the USCIS web portal. We expect to have them re-published by November 30.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 8, 2006
I-LINK Materials/INA/8 CFR/etc.
While these legal materials are available (including the redacted Adjudicator's Field Manual). They may experience intermittent problems. If you try to access this material and see a blank page, refresh your browser. The page should appear. Please note: the redacted Adjudicator's Field Manual is a very large document, and may load more slowly than other legal materials.
Policy and Procedural Memoranda
These are being republished now, and should be complete no later than November 9.
Broken Forms
We are receiving a number of comments from you that a particular form is corrupt or somehow not working. If this happens to you, please let us know the following details:
The form you are attempting to download
What version of Adobe Reader or Acrobat you are using
What browser and operating system you are using (e.g., Firefox 1.x and Windows XP)
This will hopefully help us nail down the problem. Thank you
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 7, 2006
Missing I-600A Form
Replaced the form Nov. 6
Immigration Statistics
If you are looking for the immigration statistical reports we published on USCIS.gov, they can now be found at www.dhs.gov/immigrationstatistics. Or click the related link "Immigration Statistics" on this page.
Case Processing Times
If you are looking for the listing of processing times for particular application or petition types at our regional and district offices, you may find it at the related link "Case Processing Times" on this page.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=f55cc2e9bb6be010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=7220c9ee2f82b010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD